seperating the new Cruiser

[fzj]

I think from what I have heard most americans buy their trucks and SUV's based on towing capacity and horsepower, and this is were the UZJ100 is kind of lacking, not that I'm too concerned about it myself but I would love to see the Landcruiser kick some a$$ in the head to head shoot out's that so many mags and auto shows do. I think even though the new Cruisers may not have solid front axles etc. but I think it would be very easy to seperate the Cruiser more from the rest of the toyota line, cut back on the mark up slightly, and make it a true competitor if almost every area. With a nine thousand dollar mark up, cut that in half, add a front and rear locker, a TRD supercharger, and 285 75R16 tires, also throw in heavy duty torsion bars, more aggresive rear springs, and better shocks. I think you could do all of this with not much of a price increase, and when put up head to head with other SUV's it would blow them away, 350 HP, lockers, etc. why not do this, they already have everything they need, anyway just thinking outloud, let me know what ya think

 

[ginericLC]

Market Demand! They sell every LC they import already. Our market does not demand things like lockers. Look around, other than the TRD trucks and the Jeep Rubicon what is sold with factory lockers now; Mercedes Gs? Land Rover? I think one of the reasons US doesn't get these things is for the average customer there is not a need. The other reason I bet we don't get some of this is because of warranties. Not everyone has the ability to know when to use a locker and when not to. Imagine a new 100 series with the diffs locked driving 80mph down the interstate. Then imagine the warranty work that is going to happen with people doing things like this.

 

[bad_religion_au]

you see, you live in america. toyota designed the sequotia for you, big, thirsty, and built slightly worse than a cruiser. they don't need to tart cruisers up for the USA, as they import them into america as they are sold (some version of how their sold) in other parts of the world... which is tough.

where is all the money going into a landcruiser over a sequotia... build quality...

and if the soccer moms don't understand that, then they buy yank tanks. if they tried to go head to head with exploders and the rest, it would prob be at the expense of build quality, then they would lose out to the real compeditors, which is the nissan patrol, and kind of the land rover.

 

[fzj]

oh and as for Gineric's comments on Lockers, look around you, Lockers are starting to show up all over the place, the G wagon has front, rear and center lockers, the H2 has a rear locker, and even the Touareg comes with an optional rear locker, americans may not use them as much or have a need for them on a daily basis, but the average Ferrari, or Porsche buyer also rarely hits 160mph, or needs to hit 60 in three or four seconds, but yet they feel better knowing they could, and frankley sometimes it's just that simple!

 

[fzj]

o.k. bad religion, and I'm being serious because I love the new UZJ100's, tell me where all of the difference in build quality is, I know the interior feels more solid and is nicer, but as it has been discused on this site, the 4.7 liter engine the cruiser has in now in the Sequoia, Tundra, and the 4Runner, I believe the tranny and transfer cases are also shared on some of these models(correct me if I'm wrong), so you see, 10 years ago, I could tell people why they should drop the extra money for a LC over the rest of the Toyota line up, let's take say 95, the Landcruier came with optioal front and rear lockers, full floater rear axle, 212 hp straigh six, and larger and stronger overall running gear! Now it is hard to explain to people because(once again tell me if I'm wrong) the LC shares most of it's running gear with other Toyota rigs, so you no longer have this Flagship with the masive off road ability and the abilty for almost anyone to crawl under neath one and see exactly just how different it is from the rest of the trucks!

 

[bad_religion_au]

just compare frame rails etc, suspension stuff... door thickness... i'm not 100% on your models, but i know the Sequota is made for the US only, where the 100 (and 105) is for all sorts of 3rd world countries, where reliability isn't just a nice feature... any one else wanna take a stab at this.

 

[landtank]

[quote author=bad_religion_au link=board=2;threadid=13469;start=msg124993#msg124993 date=1079949115]
any one else wanna take a stab at this.
[/quote]


No, who cares! Blah,Blah,Blah,Blah...Blah. This should be moved to s*** shat

 

[Pitbull]

FZJ, you are correct. The current Landcruiser in the USA is a cruiser in name only. You can buy a SR-5 Forerunner V-8 and get the same engine, transmission, transfercase all the electrical traction control features and a stiffer frame with 9 welded cross members, for "$30,000" less than a new LC. Now your not going to get the nice leather and some of the creature comfort features but you will get nice solid coil springs upfront versus the mall cruiser torsen bars on the LC. The Forerunner will be about 4 inches shorter in length and 2 inches narrower and 2 inches less in height, it will also weigh around 900 lbs less. The Forerunner will be a lot faster, better off road and will remind you more of our beloved 80 series. Toyota is just making a lot more money selling the new LC. The only difference that I see in quality is the more expensive luxury features. Lets face it guys people in the USA will buy something just based on the name that a manufacture puts on the product. Landcruiser is a "icon" when it comes to rough, tough, dependable off road vehicles, now Toyota is cashing in on that name. I would say the the real LC of 2004 is the forerunner. Please someone else also do the research and tell me that I'm wrong.

 

[Pitbull]

[quote author=bad_religion_au link=board=2;threadid=13469;start=msg124993#msg124993 date=1079949115]
just compare frame rails etc, suspension stuff... door thickness... i'm not 100% on your models, but i know the Sequota is made for the US only, where the 100 (and 105) is for all sorts of 3rd world countries, where reliability isn't just a nice feature... any one else wanna take a stab at this.
[/quote]

bad religion, please go to a Toyota dealership and compare the suspension, frame and build quality between a new Landcruiser and the new Forerunner. The Forerunner has a stiffer structure and better suspension and the same quality construction. The current Landcruiser is a 6 year old design. The new Forerunner is a superior design for tens of thousands of $$$ less. Don't get stuck on the name, they are both made buy Toyota, it's all about the $$$. Now if you need the additional space and the luxury features and the name LC then spend the $$$.

 

[Sammy Jenkins]

Putting a new supercharger, upgraded suspension, torsion bar and etc... Might cost at 10k or something in upgrades, but car companies will mark it up 100% for profits, or somethign rediculse of that nature. So therefore it will make it look like a super SUV. Something compared to a G55 AMG. I dont believe the LC's name has that much public accountability to match it. Therefore the general public (that knows nothing about LC's) will not purchase the vehicle at $70k-$80k (easily), and that is why I believe you should do this all for yourselves if considering. And therefore you'd have the ultimate LC. I have a little trouble making out what I just said, but for some it will make sense.

- Peace Sammy

 

[IdahoDoug]

FZJ,

I have many years experience making exactly the type of decisions you propose. I am a former Product Planner for General Motors and Lexus. You are incorrect in your initial position that most buy SUVs for towing. A very small fraction do, so altering the vehicle for these reasons makes no economic sense. In addition, as was pointed out above, Toyota easily sells every LandCruiser they import, so again from a different perspective there is no reason to change a thing.

The Trump analogy is perfect. Imagine yourself at a Toyota corporate meeting as the Product Planner for the LandCruiser line. You stand up and say "We're selling every LC we can get from our hard fought share of worldwide production. It's a highly profitable vehicle for our dealers. I say we cut our margin and make the product something it is not by making dramatic changes to its ride, handling, image and powertrain..." You would not only be wrong, you would likely be looking for a job by the end of the month. That is simply not sound business.

Doug Miller

 

[Pitbull]

[quote author=lizardking100 link=board=2;threadid=13469;start=msg125063#msg125063 date=1079970941]
A loaded LTD 4runner isn't $30k less than a 100. Unless cruisers are going for $70k?Here's a question: If the engine and entire drivetrain is the same and is basically the same vehicle (except that it's "$30k" less), how is it that 4'' longer, 2'' wider, 2'' higher vehicle weighs 900 lbs more? Must be some heavy sheet metal they are using.

Is the 4runner built by Araco?

You're right, there's nothing unique about the 100. It's a LC in name only. In fact it's just an overpriced Expedition.


[/quote]

lizard, I'm not talking loaded. I'm talking about the spirit of the LC, a tough well built vehicle that is great off road. Right now if you want something new the Forerunner is a better fit than the present LC for $30K less. Plus I don't care if Araco or your mama built them, the quality is there with both the LC and the Forerunner PS the new 2004 LC I looked at was $64K and you could still add some options to that price Who has that kind of money???

 

[Pitbull]

[quote author=lizardking100 link=board=2;threadid=13469;start=msg125114#msg125114 date=1079974521]
The question about Araco was not a rhetorical, I was just asking out of curiosity -but you're right it doesn't make a big difference.

As far as price comparison goes, you have to compare apples to apples. I see your point, but it isn't accurate to say the LC is $30k more. Even if you strip a 4runner down to a Sr5 v-6 4x4 and compare it to LC (which have few options) you still do not get 30k difference in MSRP not to mention a comparably equiped LTD with all the shiz you listed. But who cares anyway.
[/quote]

The SR-5 with V-8 4x4 Stereo CD, roof rack most of the common stuff stickered for $33,600 the LC I looked at stickered for $64,000. A comparably equiped LTD will list for $40,000. All I am saying is that Toyota is making a bundle on the 6 year old designed LC, compared to the new Forerunner. To be reasonable the LC should be priced in the high 40'sK. But who cares anyway?

 

[Sammy Jenkins]

The way IdahoDoug posts, I think he knows what he is talking about.... but thats just me.

-Sammy

 

[fzj]

when I started this topic I was actually kind of hoping someone with alot of knowledge and facts would jump in and point out(with detail) differences between the Landcruiser and the rest of the Toyota lineup, or maybe explain were they believe toyota is going with the LC. Instead is what I got was the same basic thing that hapens when I have a discusion with a lot of domestic owners about my 80 series, and why I believe it is such a great truck, when they have no facts, they just say "who cares" "blah blah blah" or "f-off" that's great, I guess we can't look at the fact that with a continued sales decline, underpowered engine, and a huge price tag, the LC may be gone from our shores soon, I was merely saying they should really seperate it from the rest of the lineup, it's not one of there bread and butter vehicles anyway, I think sales are now below 10,000 a year, and it's not like you have to get on a waiting list to get one, you guys are making it sound like they can't keep these things on the lot, where I live they usualy have two or three sitting there for awhile, I think people need to see a little more bang for there buck, and as for my comment on Horsepower and towing capacity selling truck and SUV's, I have constantly read that in Truck Trend magazine! Oh yah and if anyone out there actually has some facts on why the LC is worth the extra money, I really do want to know, and just for the record I own a 94 fzj80, and prior to that I had a 2000 UZJ100, and a 91fj80!

 

[ebod]

Somewhere up the thread, someone said that the forerunner is better off-road than the 100 series cruiser. Is this true (I always thought the cruiser was the one to buy for hard off-road use)? If so, why (other than size)? If not, why?

 

[fzj]

I was not the one who mentioned that, but I think is what he was saying is that with the same basic drivetrain, but a arguably better front suspension(coils over torsion bars) the 4runner may be better in some situations than the Cruiser, I'm just taking a guess at what he ment, and it does make sense, the traction control systems are the same, so it really is hard to see where the Cruiser is better offroad. Now if you take a 97 landcruiser versus a 97 4runner the Cruiser will eat it up, I think that is were people got there overall feeling of the Landcruiser, and unfortunatly that is in the past, unless they decide to change that!

 

[fzj]

actually I had a 2000 UZJ100 for just under a year, I bought it new back in 2000, it is a wonderful truck, and I admit it does have many advantages to my 80 series, most of them being in the interior in my opinion, if I could have my way I would have a 100 series interior with and 80series exterior and drivetrain, o.k. I'll take the V8 too. And why do I care what Toyota does and builds, because I take alot of pride in my Cruiser, and for that matter Toyota products in general, so yes just like so many people who take pride in certain companies I take pride in Toyota, and I would love nothing more than to see the Landcruiser at the top once again, so we can retake the offroad crown once again!!

 

[bad_religion_au]

does the 4runner still run a mintruck (hilux) rear axle... aust didn't get the 4skinner since about 92. if so there might be a diff. all the 100's in aust seem to run a full float axle. is that true of a 4skinner? i ask because i don't know.

 

[alaskacruiser]

fzj and Pitbull- I agree with you. I think sales numbers speak volumes. Of course increased competition in the SUV market has hurt LC sales, but lagging sales are also due to the fact that consumers can find better values elsewhere. The LC's pricepoint has moved up so much and its strengths so diminished that its nameplate is no longer enough for most consumers. The new 4Runner is arguably a superior offroad rig right now, and the heavy-duty equipment that used to differentiate the LC has been mostly replaced to complete the soccer-mom-SUV transformation.

Instead of making excuses for Toyota and explaining basic supply and demand, people here should realize that rigs like the GWagon, H2, Tourag, Rubicon have lockers- the H2 is a much more mainstream vehicle than the LC, so why do they take the trouble to include such an option if demand isn't there? To maintain the vehicle's offroad ability, that's why. The LC is Toyota's flagship SUV with a substantial history for offroad ability- I think fzj is right on the money- add a bigger engine, lockers, and price the vehicle more fairly. Nobody can tell me that "build quality" costs them an extra $30k when the engine, tranny, transfer case, etc. are shared with much cheaper vehicles. They are obviously in it for greater profits than they made with the 80.

Just because Toyota once made a great vehicle, that doesn't make them perfect. People here are defending Toyota for doing what makes the most sales sense, but you guys are ignoring the fact that 1) the LC is NOT selling well here! and 2) They weren't doing what was best for sales with our beloved 80s, were they? Their first priority there was making sure the vehicle lived up to the LC name.